To consider the above report

Members considered a request to recast the 2015-16 Revenue Budget to reflect the additional unplanned expenditure currently being incurred in Adults Social Care.

Councillor Dudley explained that a number of councils across the country had encountered difficulties in the course of the financial year, leading to a significant overspend. It was therefore proposed to add an additional £2.084m be added to protect the most vulnerable residents. He was confident this would address the full-year out-turn situation. Without prudent finances this would have presented the borough with significant issues; the council was in a better position than others that it was able to recast the budget.  Budget setting for 2016-17 had already built in a minimum of £3m for Adult Social Care.

Councillor Dudley explained that £600,000 would come from savings in the Operations directorate; he congratulated the Director. A further £1.484m would come from the Development Fund. The Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) was a revenue expenditure which went through the council’s accounts in order to assist with paying debt in the future. Fortunately it was not necessary that the council incurred the ongoing revenue charge because of significant assets the council could realise, in particular land holdings.

Councillor McWilliams commented that in the autumn statement the government had suggested that councils could raise additional funding for adult social care by increasing council tax. Council tax was regressive. In this borough the strong economy and strong processes had mitigated the need to increase council tax.

Councillor Ilyas, as Chairman of the Adult Services & Health Overview & Scrutiny Panel, warmly welcomed the injection of additional funds. Making accurate forecasts was not an easy task. The country was extremely fortunate to have the NHS which was successful due to the hard work and dedication of its workers. Due to this the population had better health and lived longer. Those who were less fortunate relied on Adult Social Care services for a better quality of life. The borough had made necessary provisions through the expertise of officers and the Lead Member. He wholeheartedly supported the recommendations for all residents.

Councillor Mrs Jones stated that she completely supported the proposals. However, on page 218 of the budget proposal for 2015/16 was a graph produced by the Independent Commission on Local Government Finance. It indicated that, as far as to 2019/20, central funding would continue to reduce and the costs relating to Adult Social Care would continue to rise.  At the time she highlighted that the Independent Commission indicated further central government funding reductions and cost growth and it had called into question the decision to cut council tax. Her comment had been ‘With the budget detail noting these risks, would it not be more prudent to freeze council tax, still collect the freeze bonus and not put additional unnecessary pressure on both officers and services?’ There were senior officers that now spent an inordinate amount of time trying to achieve savings targets set by the administration.

When she had mentioned this in her response at the budget debate she had been told that she was full of doom and gloom and that despite her negativity the council had always delivered. This time it had not delivered a balanced and achievable budget; the council was now forecasting an overspend in Adult Services of £2.8m .

The government had given the go ahead for councils to implement a 2% council tax rise next year to cover the demographic growth in Adult Social Care, this would be equate to £1.2m, not enough to cover the shortfall. She had recently been told (on Twitter) that if she did not want to support over £2m investment in vulnerable adults then she should vote against it. Her issue was that the money should have been in the budget in the first place. Council Members ignored the Independent Commission’s information, implemented a £1.3 million revenue reduction and was now having to mitigate against that decision. She asked for reassurance that this would not happen again in the next budget round.

Councillor Burbage commented that it was difficult to budget exactly in areas with high volatility. Despite repeated ability to make savings it had been rare that the council had collected too little tax rather than too much. The council had prudent reserves and finances.

It was proposed by Councillor Dudley and seconded by Councillor McWilliams and:

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Council agree an additional £2.084m to be added to the 2015-16 Revenue Budget for Adult Social Care to be funded by the virement of:

1.    £600k budget from the Operations Directorate (representing the current projected underspend).

2.   £1.484m from the Councils Development Fund. (Details of the Fund in Appendix A)